Transcripts For CSPAN2 Hearing On Child Hunger Food Assistance Programs 20200208

>> to give an opening statement barco every child deserves a chance to grow up healthy. children should not have to worry about where the next meal will come fromo. that's an unimaginable burden for a young person to deprive them of their childhood. food insecuritypr hurts children's academic outcomes and their ability to pay attention and their behavior it has long-term impacts of physical and mental health and even lifetime earnings. as doctor king said in 1964 there is nothing new about poverty. what is new is that we have the resources now to get rid of it for go that same year , 1964 america enacted the precursor to the supplemental nutritional assistance program known as snap perk america still has the resources to address poverty to lift up the most vulnerable to achieve the american dream. snap is one of our best tools for doing that. it provides moderate assistance to feed americans in need on average only $1.43 per meal for participants in 70 percent of households receiving snap benefits have children. it doesn't just help the children and the elderly and the disabled making of two thirds of the participants, it also boost the economy more than any other government program. according to moody's, every dollar snap benefits increases gdp by $1.73. every one dollar snap benefits increases the national economy by $1.73. it is an incredible return on investment and snap creates job according to the usda every $10000 of snapap benefits has one full-time world job in approximately every $25000 of benefits creates one full-time urban job. snapsn dollars are spent on food necessities flowing into local businesses supporting trucking and farm jobs among others. this is designed to feed children and elderly and disabled also boost our economy to create jobs for brazos committee is responsible for combating wasteom r, fraud and abuse it is worth noting snap related fraud is almost nonexistent. it gives states flexibility to tailor the program to their citizens needs. first it incentivizes work to allow states to ease income eligibility limit so somebody doesn't have to turn down work to maintain eligibility to get back on their feet. second it allows citizens to own a car to save for an emergency like surprise medical bills theur administration currently through their proposal to change snap once to disarm these tools but in doing so it willll strip eight.1 million households of their snap benefits including more than 2 million household with children. but also strips free lunch enrollment from nearly 1 million kids and for those children the policy would take food out of their mouths at home and at school how do we expect them to succeed? the administration needs to abandon the i proposal and the late elisha cummings would have said we are better than this. we know what a difference snap makes for families and children who would otherwise go hungry perk i know from personal experience perk i came to the united states from india with my parents at three months old so my father could pursue his education and our family could embrace the opportunities america has to offer despite my parents best efforts it was not easy. when we needed help we could receive food stamps as my parents worked their way out of a difficult time. today my father is an engineering professor of 40 years still teaching at bradley university in peoria. my brother is a doctor and i'm a congressman. that was myy family stream and it was possible because of my parents hard work but also because of the opportunities our country presents and the generosity and goodwill of the american people. and american president once told congress hunger in a land such as ours is embarrassing and intolerable that was richard nixon berger president nixon and doctor king could agree on the importance of fighting hunger all those decades ago shirley we can find common ground today to continue congresses strong support for snap. now i recognize the chairwoman for her opening statements. >> thank you so much and thank you all for coming today progress chairwoman on oversight reform i want to thank the chairman for neconomic consumer policy to convene this important hearing also thank him for sharing his personal story how important this program is and we need to protect our food for our families and many that are struggling. i think he really show the importance of this incredible program. this hearing will examine the proposed rollbacks of the categorical eligibility for snap for go one of the most important programs the federal government has. this is the third in a series of four hearings we are having a speaking examining thear negative effects of the trump administration's policies on housing and hunger and health regulations for children. these are about the administration's attack on children. congress should be protecting children from the administration's harmful regulations and ensuring that our children have the resources they need to reach their full potential. one out of six children in this country is already food insecure meaning they lack reliable access to food. according to the us department of agriculture's own estimate estimates, if this proposal is enacted 680,000 households of children would lose the food benefits and nearly 1 million children would likely lose direct enrollment for free school meals. the administration's effort to rollback broad-based eligibility for snap will increase food insecurity for children across this country oud any effort to modify snap should not make kids hungry especially here in america. i yelled back and i thank you chairwoman and your leadership on this issue. i appreciate it thank you for your leadership and all of these hearings are so important and it shows the uniformity of attack on children looking at food and rolling back the poverty standard, loosening controls on conditions into the environmen environment, they are all damaging to children. i think we should put in bills to put them all back to make it law in the country. >> thank you chairwoman. >> mr. cloud will present his opening statement following the witnesses. let me first introduce miss davis, senior vice president for the no kid hungry campaign for go thank you so much principal jespersen elementary school in cheboygan and wisconsin. thank you so much and diane sullivan. and advocate with the organization witnesses to hunger. next at teacher at oakville high school in fayetteville. thank you and of course thank you for comping a policy director for the pal foundation for gal. please rise and raise your right hand i will begin by swearing you in. do you swear or affirm the testimony are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth so help you god? let the record show that the witnesses answered in the affirmative, thank you and you may be seated. the microphones are sensitive please speak directly into them green means go. red means stop. and yellow unlike with stoplights here it means speed up. d[laughter] you now recognize for five minutes. good morning and thank you for the opportunity to share concerns about the administration's proposed rule to that broad-based categorical eligibility i'm president of the no kid hungry campaign ending poverty and hunger we do have a particular focus on children here in the uniteded states. i am here today to talk about two things. first to provide a brief overviewil and why it is so important for families, and second how the rule working for families and seniors and individuals with disabilities. first it is an effective practical policy many families slightly above 130 percent of poverty that still have difficulty making ends m meet because of high cost of things like housing andre childcare and medical benefits be vce allows these children to remain eligible for snap and free school meals reduces administrative burdens on's agencies are most importantly it encourages work to help low income families move out of poverty to build financial security allows them to accumulate modest assets and to help ensure their children can receive the nutrition that they need at home and at school. what it is not as an automatic pathway to snap benefits through the regular process that has rigorous procedures for documenting income and a circumstances they can be categorically eligible and not receive the benefit because the netet income is high. let me give you an example. assume a mother for two children who is $12.50 an hour could receive $161 in snap per month without ever wages increased by just 50 cents an hour or income would exceed 50 percent of poverty and her family would lose snap that extra $75 per month you were in resources she would actually could not accept a marginal raise so to let the family earns increase so it is the robust body of research that snap is the most effective nutrition program for children with the food insecurity and poverty and without long-term outcome and lifetime earnings provides a return on investment with a corporate ceo and make no mistake the restrict is a harsh step backward to fight childhood hunger if the administration proposed rule becomes law 1 million people or will lose the snap benefits entirely and 982,000 children will lose the automatic certification for preschool meals even many of them will remain eligible for free or reduced price meals that far too many will fall through the cracks confusion about eligibility human error and stigma create a barrier to enrollment on even lower cost is a heaven burden of families saving every dime to cover basics like rent and utilities and gas. so what happens when children miss school meals and exacerbates all of the other problems children face in addition to academic performance the mental and physical health and the opportunity toth achieve full potential. food is one of the most important school supplies children have. i work with families of food insecurity moms and dads working in their lives and their children holding multiple jobs cutting expenses to the bone but yet find it impossible to stretch their paycheck to make ends meet like the car repair or the medical bill to set them back months or years i would like to leave you with one final thought categorical eligibility is working to help low income families work and build savings and insurer they need to grow and thrive and reach their full t potential this is that we can all agree on. thank you. >> thank you. >> it is 10:00 a.m. monday morning sitting in your third grade classroom the cro teacher introduces a reading lesson for the day on how consonant blends work together to make sounds to decode words in your reading working together with a partner to identify words with the same pattern you think everyone can focus on the task but you cannot it's been approximately 65 hours situate a substantial meal on friday at lunch at school if tryou start to feel anxious and frustrated all you can think about is the lunch. that will not begin for another two hours the teacher notices you are not paying attention and asked you to focus on the partner project so you have to understand tnd ts and you think this is not as important to me as it is to you. i'm hungry you lose that connection because you think she doesn't understand you so then after several weeks and months of turning teachers out you realize you are so far behind your peers to catch up academically seems overwhelming and not worth your energy. and thenn to disrupt the class all of these disruptions get you sent to the principal's office to envoy the embarrassment of not knowing the material as they become worse chronic and severe than you are suspended from school. then your attendance rate drops in a desperation overcomes you you decide to drop out of school. with the limited options for employment it is not stable chenough you are living paycheck to paycheck you start a family and what is best for them in whatever he parentsn, wants a better future. so to work several jobs to become financially secure but to do so you're not spending family home with your your kids want you around your child's school once you there but being there are financial solvency. one of the biggest barriers to academic socialac success in social mobility is nutrition. jefferson elementary has students like this as well as countless schools across the country they are not only located in major urban areas but suburban and rural communities even in sheboygan county the lowest percentage of unemployment in the country changes affecting eligibility to access school nutrition has an overall negative e affect the schools and communities across the country. using the combined average from direct certified families the district has four schools eligible participating in the tprogram that allows the schools to operate free breakfast and lunch to all students regardless of participation in the snap program.n they no longer have to have a compact one - - a complex application by the simpler form that used to determine if they are fyeconomically disadvantaged when all students are participating in school lunch it creates an environment free of stigma if they are eating the same meal it's a pair less apparent which come from low income families if they participate without negative stigma that increases dramatically our data shows when more students have meal options then we can adjust schedule to serve breakfast in the classroom that allows teachers and students to share a meal and those relationships that go beyond education they can talk about their lives outside of school and learn important social schools - - social skills those relationships created are invaluable to focus on the whole child offering free meal options to focus energy and resources parents have to buy fewer groceries because they know their child will have a nutritious breakfast and spending quality time with their kids rather than franticallyy preparing breakfast and lunch is and they can use that money to provide other essential needs for theirne families or their own career advancement. with a broad-based eligibility a segment of families will no longer qualify for snap when this percentage goes down we are unable to offer free breakfast and lunch to all students. without these options available families are forced to make tough decisions for theirio families the result is an increase in hunger and less educational opportunity and upward mobility for our country's most valuable and vulnerable population, our kids thank you so much for this opportunity to present the story about jefferson elementary school and i thank you very much. ms. sullivan five minutes. >> chairman and members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to prove one - - to present testimony i am diane sullivan i am experiencing hunger and i have been anti- poverty advocate for the past 20 years. and for those harmful policies and then for those states to consider those economicni conditions determining which of those residents qualify. my family is among the three.1 million americans who will lose snaps benefits if this proposed rule stands. because my two daughters work in addition to my own income from their part-time jobs is considered when determined eligibility our combined monthly gross income is $124 above the federal limit of 130 percent. for a familyly of five. but because it has broad eligibility and the work-related expenses are consistentcu the income after deductions qualified s $187 of monthly benefits. my state ranks highest in rental housing cost second in childcare and first in terms of the cost of our food. and allowing states to consider these barriers faced by residents for the massachusetts allow for households up to 200 percent to be considered for snap. not eligible by considered. and then to receive pamphlet walkout was not benefits that is not how this works. 135 percent and then to determine and then to fall below the federal threshold and it took three months of the confusion we are recovering from the time for what we must be eligible. that i was dipping into funds for rent and utilities and visiting food pantries to feed myo family. that the vehicle broke down and needed repair the juggling act had us all in 2019 holiday season. my children do not ask for much they are well-adjusted and respectful and caring but that doesn't minimize the pain that i as a mothers that fulfillshe the modern wish list and filling it with a feast i was empty under the tree with their gifts should have been and we ate the one meal that we were grateful. the fruit bowl often sat empty i stretch one meal into two. and to be pushed back into the same situation that is implemented without snap in addition to having less food at home i sons can lose access to free school meals. even with the reduced cost at $252 of an annual expense my already overwhelmed budget .cannot afford. further, we will lose access to the healthy incentive program making purchase fresh produce from farmers more affordable i'm an advocate for our neighbors who struggle to afford food in this nation of agricultural abundance. the past two years have taught me that productive farmers who do produce the most affordable food options in the world are perhaps the most best friends low income people could have increasingly policymakers and food activists face burdens that drive up food prices. low income families are caught in the middle between one ideology that's more expensive than the other of the safety net like many burdens placed on farmers is designed by people who could afford not even to look at food prices when they shop. please understandan from someone who has worked hard and struggled and raised really good children against the odds this is a got shot to those least equipped thank you for taking the time from hearing not just policy expert but also the six beer one - - expert in the experience of hunger. thank you. >> you have five minutes. >> chairman and ranking member and members of the subcommittee i am a social studies teacher in west virginia. situated in the southern portion of the state which is struggling due to coal revenues the majority of my etudents come from household struggling to make ends meet many of my students are the primary caregivers of their younger siblings i have students who are homeless , lost parents to an overdose and are working evening jobs to contribute financially to their families. for these reasons and many more it is gutwrenching to see a proposal cut snap benefits that will only hurt these children and families even more. thank you for giving me the opportunity to share food insecurity is a real and tangible threat to my students and their well-being everyday i see the impact hunger can have on a student and academically students are unable to focu focus, causing them to miss vital information in class. the more information the missing class that further behind they fall. food insecurity affects families emotionally when parents are struggling to put food on the table many feel a sense of worthlessness. children can sense this especially students like mine. as educators we see them bring these issues into the classroom with them. they carry the emotional bowden - - the emotional burdens they have on the food and secure home i have witnessed this in many ways ranging from irritability and mood swings to outburst and beyond. this is a real issue that needs to be considered to provide access to food and nutrition archive. my real fear and concern is that if this proposal comes to fruition many of my students along with thousands of others in westni virginia will lose access to food at home and at school while it is true some of those students will qualify for food and reduced price meals it willr require parents or legal guardians to submit paperwork this is a purposeful unnecessary barrier there are countless instances they cannot complete the required paperwork i can tell you this could be due to pride or shame or incapacitation as a result of addiction. almost a decade ago my school district recognize the need to combat food insecurity plaguing students. we included a universal program so all students no matter the social economic status receive free breakfast and lunch this is a combined effort of the federal government our school district and taxpayers to care for our most vulnerable population, our children perk every school in our district qualifies under the community eligibility provision we receive federal money to cover the initialy cost and the money from the excess levee covers the rest records up for a vote every five years and is always past with more than a 70 percent pass rate the message the district - - the district sends is clear we care about kids and their need for proper nutrition while i am proud for the universal program it does raise an orimportant question, is it fair to expect a school district to shoulder the responsibility of this magnitude? . . . . employees try to meet the basic needs of our students while also families. we love and care for kids but that's why we are in the business we are in.but is it fair to expect us to shoulder this burden too? in southern west virginia our families, students, schools, and communities are hurting. unfortunately, our situation is not unique. the issues we face can also be found in cities, towns, and rural communities across this nation. this proposal will do much harm and provide no help to the families that need it the most. the family struggle will be compounded and kids will suffer. we can and must do better. thank you for the opportunity. >> mr. sam adolphsen you have five minutes. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. millionaires should not be eligible for food stamps. neither should someone with $20,000 in the bank, a new four wheeler or just debts create in the garage or owner of ula private aircraft. state government should do basic checks to make sure the truly needy only received ãb only the truly needy receive food stamps. this is in conspiracy are controversial, it's just common sense. food stamps are met for the neediest americans. i witnessed firsthand how an innocent sounding policy like broad-based categorical eligibility known as bbc can open the door wide to fraud and abuse. when i was the chief operating officer at the maine department of health and human services and oversaw foodstamp of eligibility, we struggle to maintain integrity in the program, because of bbc. someone on welfare in maine actually owned an airplane and recently a millionaire detailed how is it was for him to get well for legally thanks to bbce. congress did its job in setting ability standards for the food stamp program. in congress also had a good idea and trying to reduce administrative duplication by allowing automatic enrollment for some other welfare recipients. what congress meant for good, bureaucrats used as a gimmick. rather than reduce administrative costs, the clinton administration exploited the policy to maximize enrollment. here's how it works. anyone who receives a brochure printed with money from another welfare program is automatically enrolled. with the ridiculous justification that it's the same as receiving a real welfare benefit. that loophole is so bad today that the welfare office often deems applicant's eligible based on the possibility of receiving the so-called benefit. they don't receive that. then no one looks at a bank account, there are no asset checks of any kind. the income limit is instantly expanded by nearly double in most states. all with the wave of the magic owelfare wand. it's the epitome of welfare fraud. unfortunately, it has a federal stamp of approval in more than 40 states. the result is that millions of people with significant assets who are ineligible according to law are on food stamps. many of these recipients have incomes up to double the federal poverty level. that means they can be eligible for food stamps with nearly the same income level as the average american household. for the truly needy who depend on the food stamp program, that just simply is not fair. it's not fair to congress who wrote the law and made it clear that it does not want food stamps for all but rather, food stamps for those who truly need them. the administrative state should never have been allowed to expand welfare beyond what congress sanctioned and the rule put forward by the trump eradministration will correct that overreach. because this is such a practical change, those opposed to closing the simple have decided to pivot to talking points about the program that is only loosely connected to food stamps, the school lunch program. the truth is, the real impact of this rule on school lunches is virtually zero. in fact, in 34 states, not one single child will lose their school lunch eligibility as a result of this rule. in the other states, a child eligible for free or reduces school lunch based on their income level asset and federal law, will remain eligible for free and reduced school lunch. very few, just 9600 out of 30 million kids who received free or reduced school lunch may need to pay their portion to school lunch because they need to be eligible only to this loophole. there might be zero impact because kids and continuing eligibility provision schools will continue to get ãbwith no eligibility process at all. those schools get universal free lunch today. the trump administration should be applauded for the simple common sense omrule. especially now in this booming economy it makes sense to close the polls and government gimmicks and transition adults and their families from welfare to work, from government dependency to self-sufficiency in the american dream. >> thank you mr. adolphsen, i think the example, if that's true, that someone owed an airplane and got food stamps proves that snap's fraud detection works. i'm glad you brought up that example. there's so many groups out there that want to see hungry kids fed so that they can succeed and they rose up in strong support of this hearing. i'm going to seek unanimous consent to enter letters into the record from seven of those groups we're proud to received these following letters of support.one from president randy weingarten of the american federation of teachers, a letter from the u.s. conference of mayors signed by 70 u.s. mayors from both red and blue states including mayors in texas, west virginia, ohio, and north carolina. a letter from 24 faith groups, a letter from maison, a jewish response to hunger, a letter from the religious action center of reform judaism, a letter from the national women's law center a letter from the west virginia chamber of commerce and a letter from a group of achefs who feed hungr kids through the no kid hungry campaign. without objection so entered, i now recognize ranking member cloud for his opening statement. >> thank you chairman and thank you witnesses and let me first apologize for my tardiness. i was across town at the national prayer breakfast and with the president leaving we were locked in so they could clear the roads. i apologize. i do thank you for being here this morning to talk about this important topic. a supplemental nutrition assistance program also known as snap provides nutritional assistance to low income americans who cannot afford nutritional food for themselves and their families. snap has always been designed to be a temporary safety net for hathose who find themselves in a situation that leaves them food insecure. but speaking of welfare reform, then-president bill clinton said we need to transform a broken system that traps too many people in a cycle of dependence to one that emphasizes work and independence to get people in welfare a chance to draw a paycheck not a welfare check to give those on welfare what we want for all families in america the opportunity to succeed at home and at work. last july they say too primitive agriculture the agency that administers snap issued a proposed rule regarding snap categorical eligibility. unfortunately some bad actors and some states on the convenience of taken advantage of loopholes to circumvent the requirements for eligibility beyond what was originally intended. as the administration continues to examine ways to reform government programs, i think it's important for us to keep in mind that country's current economic climate since president trump took office this u.s. economy has created over 6 million jobs. the unemployment rate has dropped 3.5 percent. the lowest it's been in this country in 50 years. in 2018 the level of food insecurity in america dropped to 11.1 percent the lowest level since 2007. it could seem, judging by the title of today's hearing, that some may argument we blame the president for number of school children no longer receiving school lunches for free. none of the administration's policy proposals regarding chance and have yet to go into effect. when they do, however, 96 percent of the children affected by the proposed rule will remain qualify for reduced, priced, or free meals under the national school lunch program. importantly, all eligible children will continue to receive reduced price or free meals under the national school lunch program. one could say the president is responsible for the reduction, but not because of some gregorian heartless policy that's gone into effect but rather because the trump economy is providing opportunity and upward mobility across the democratic spectrum. freeing many from reliance on the government. of course there is still work to be done and there always will be but i hope we can have a poproductive conversation tod in good faith on how to ensure that the funds allocated for these purposes are going to those truly in need. these conversations are never easy, but if we can't have these conversations now, when so many are taking steps toward financial independence, when can we? studies have shown that states are providing snap benefits to 3 to 4 million individuals who do not meet basic eligibility requirements. let's remember that at least 96 percent of those receiving school luncheons would still be eligible should the rule go into effect. with some studies showing even more. i think it's important today eethat we keep in mind what rea compassion is. because there is a great tendency among politicians here in washington dc to first convince themselves and then try to convince the american owpeople that are virtuous publ servants as measured by how much of their money we spend. we can often air in choosing those fines execs by metrics that simply measure activity as opposed to efficacy. or we can have real compassion that cares enough to do the hard work and due diligence necessary to ensure that our best intentions as congress are actually producing the desired outcomes. as we look to address the needs of our nation, we have a responsibility to be good stewards of the people's money that does mean from time to time is not only write but also our duty to evaluate our aworking and make adjustments ensure our nation is having the desired outcome and being managed efficiently. compassion takes into account both those in need as those working to fulfill the need and even more so, those that will come after us. as our constitution states, our purpose is to secure the blessings of liberty not only for ourselves but also for posterity. thank you chairman, i yield back. >> thank you mr. cloud, i recognize myself for five minutes of questioning. ms. davis, it's our understanding that freight fraud is almost nonexistent in snap, can you explain that and tell us why staff is so effective at preventing fraud and would you mind addressing mr. adolphsen's comments in that regard. >> and be happy to. snap has one of the most effective antifraud records of any government program. less than one percent of benefits are paid improperly and there are criminal al penalties for people who violate the law and engage in criminal conduct and so should be. the vast majority of payments are paid to families that need them. one point i'd like to make is that this rule doesn't close a loophole, it slams a doorway out of poverty shut for the working families. i think we all share the belief that a good job is the best way out of poverty and that public assistance policy should foster and encourage work. that's why this rule is so baffling because the categorical eligibility does not as well as any other policy i know of. only .2 percent of snap benefits go to families with net incomes over 100% of poverty. in its own regulatory analysis usda noted that those that would be most effective are working families with children who have very high cost of housing and childcare. they also even noted that the result would likely be an increase in food insecurity and hardship. which is unacceptable. and finally, if i may for one more point, on this oatmeal point i'd like to clear up the facts, i take exception to the idea that virtually no children will be harmed, 40,000 kids will lose free and reduced price meals entirely and for each one of those kids, that's a very big deal. more than half of those kids will move from free meals to reduced price meals as ms. sullivan mentioned other educators, and as we hear every day, that might not seem m like lot all of us who are quite comfortable but to a family that is making trade-offs between paying for utilities or buying gas to get to work, that is a very significant sum of money. it can have a really profound impact. >> ms. sullivan, let me allow you to address this issue of fraud. i think this comes up repeatedly. and mr. comment on this snap's comments in regard to that too. >> ãbmr. adolphsen's comments in regard to that too. >> this gentleman does not know me but he assumes that he does. i believe he used the terms, here's how it works, i can tell you from my perspective as a snap recipient how it works. the biggest issue and the reason why there is so much talk and rhetoric, there are assumptions about who we are as people is that we are not here in these rooms at these tables so i would be happy to have a conversation, follow-up conversation, to fully inform him of the realities and i understand that you worked in a state administration and i think, here's the thing, nobody is going to deny that fraud were waste or abuse doesn't exist, it's next to minimal but why are we focusing so much attention on that? especially when it is such a small portion? what we need to be focused on is families like mine who will be impacted. i am not a fraud. i work. i do everything i can to provide the best. just like everybody in this room does. i want the best for my children and feeding them healthy food is the foundation for them to build, that's what we need to be focused on. >> i think there's a misconception that you want to beyond snap aid. what's your response to that? >> my response is i absolutely do not. there is so much shame associated with it. >> tell us about that. why is there shame aassociated? >> because people will assume that because we are accessing programs, that we are frauds because there are people that are out there spreading that type of misinformation. we become political footballs in this game. our children, the most vulnerable, the least able to stand up and defend themselves are essentially being told to do your part, pay your way, i work, i happen to live in a state that's one of the most expensive in the country, our e energy costs are among the highest. we struggle and we are hardly the only ones. 3.1 million people about to lose benefits and we know that there is more. we the people that are being impacted need to be in these spaces where these policies are being discussed so we can take back the narrative about ourselves. we know who we are as people. we know our value in our communities and to our families. it's time that we control that conversation and stop allowing people like this gentleman over here to my left to control that narrative usabout us. [applause] mr. cloud, your recognized for five minutes of questions. i'm sorry, miss miller, your recognized for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you chairman and ranking member cloud for holding this very important hearing today. i want to thank ms. tony for being here. she's from west virginia and it's nice to have another fellow west virginia in the room that recognizes the importance of keeping our children and their families fed. this topic is extremely personal and critical to my district. i want to recognize the fact that everyone who is here today is committed to making sure that people who are struggling, receive the help they need to live happy and healthy lives. additionally, adequate nutrition during infancy and early childhood is essential for child idevelopment and well-being. the programs were created to help families and children who nare in great need, as i have said before in this committee and we can disagree on what helps or what hurts but our goals are the same and i support the administration for the work they've been doing to help guide families off of welfare. i will fight to make sure benefits are given to the people that need them. these are our children, we don't want them to go hungry. mr. adolphsen, how many children participate in the national school lunch program annually? >> approximately 30 million. >> with school-age children who are statutorily eligible for the program continue to qualify for reduced lunch program price meals? >> yes ma'am, they would. >> as i mentioned in my testimony, this issue is extremely important in my district. west virginia has distruggled, but it does not affect the eligibility requirements for child nutrition programs, is that correct? >> it does not directly affect the eligibility as laid out for that program in law. >> okay. in the state of the union address on tuesday the president iohighlighted that 7 million americans have come off of food stamps, this number is exciting when it means that there are people who are now financially stable and can provide for their families. in fiscal year 2017 there were an estimated 42.2 million monthly snap participants. in 2020 participants estimated there were 36.4 million, that's a big difference. in your opinion, is it safe to assume that the 7 million off food stamps are a result of a stronger economy? >> there's no question about it, record number of open jobs, record number of people going back to work, there have also been reforms done at the state level that have helped spur this change. work requirements have come back into effect in the number of states and we've seen great results of people moving to welfare to work and back into the workforce. >> i would like to hear more about your time that you spent in the maine department of health and human services. you oversaw operations for their welfare program. what were the most important key takeaways from your experience? and how they relate to today's discussion? >>. >> thank you for that question. as it relates to the e,bbc, i c tell you a little bit more about what i saw and why i saw the disconnection with the fraud. when someone is approved through bbce and 97 percent of all people on food stamps on bbce states are approved through bbce, there is no asset check at all. what happens is, information that would normally be available to you as an agency to determine and verify the status, household composition, income sources, other things like that, the agency does not even look at it at all. the challenge there is it opens the door to fraud. the gao said people who come into bbc three times more likely to have errors and in 2011 the obama administration actually stopped looking at bbce cases for payment errors. that is never reflected in this percentage of fraud that folks are referencing. >> how many people would that be? >> it's hard to come up with an exact number because we don't check assets now. a quick example, the largest fraud case in maine history over $200,000 a woman stole, she did report that her husband lived with her. she was on the program through bbce so her assets were checked. when they later found this fraud through a report, they look at her bank accounts and isher husband was listed as a joint owner of the bank account. that was fraud that could've been caught and we checked things like assets at the front door, which bbce does not allow. >> i yield back my time. >> i think that we should always make sure to check 100% of the witnesses statistics at this point, for their validity. let me turn the questioning over to chairwoman maloney for five minutes of questioning. >> thank all of you for sharing esyour testimony today and in your opening statements, you detailed how vital snap is to combating hunger in this nation. i'm stunned that the trump administration is taking onacti that would result in 3.1 million duindividuals losing their snap eligibility. ms. davis, while food insecurity is a very personal and intimate issue that a family may face, it's unfortunately not uncommon in our country. how many people across this country experience food insecurity each year? >> according to the latest data from usda, more than 37 million people live in food insecure households in the u.s. that iincludes 11.3 million childre or one in seven of our nation's kids. people living with food insecurity are found in every oscounty in every congressional district across our nation, urban, suburban, and rural. and though that number is still much much too high, i would point out that child food insecurity has declined to the lowest point since 1998 and that is due in large part by actions taken by devious administrations and bipartisan congressional access to strengthen access to snap for families with children. >> what is the long-term consequences to a child's health and well-being if they experience food insecurity in childhood? >> those consequences are very profound. food insecure children have higher rates of mental and physical health ãbpoor mental and physical health. they're more likely to be hospitalized to common illnesses like stomachaches and colds, asthma, adolescents experience in food insecure face a host of mental health issues and are at a much greater risk for depression and other mental health problems. including suicidal ideation. a report published by the center on developing child at harvard university highlights a nutrition as a key foundational pillar for healthy child to vomit. food access and intake are critical issues that impact a lchild's lifelong health trajectory. the cognitive delays that food insecure children face put them behind the peers at kindergarten and years to come. >> and yet instead of proposing measures that would help to reduce food insecurity in this nation the administration's proposed new rule to take snap benefits away from 3.1 million children. and people. gimrs. sullivan, you are a moth and i can only imagine the struggle you face to provide food for your children each day. can you explain how important snap has been to your children? >> absolutely. there have been times, as a parent, there's probably no worse feeling you could experience than putting your children to bed on an empty a belly. i think back to those times where i've been there and i was as a breast-feeding mother unable to take in calories for myself to then produce enough milk to sustain my newborn daughter at the time who then as a result of the physical impacts of not taking in enough calories she herself had to then attend physical and occupational therapy to rebound, we are talking about a newborn. in the times when snap has been available to me because, let me just make one thing clear, normally families i have myself, i will wait until the very last minute because there's nothing, to me it's a very traumatic experience to walk into a state office and ask for assistance. it's a reminder of you hit rock bottom, you are of the intense trauma of the moment. in those times when i be able to access snap benefits that we are eligible for, i am able to provide for my family, doing what we all want to do, healthy snacks that my children are able to argrab on their way fro school to work to their activities. literally just having enough food to put on the table. so many times i've literally cried myself to sleep and i know i'm not alone in this. there are millions of us out there because i didn't eat myself that day and was uncertain of how i would feed my children the next day. this is the reality. the reality that so many of us face. >> ms. tony and principal happen, how would the administration's proposal affect the ability of the children in your schools to come to school ready to learn? >> thank you for your question congresswoman. our kids in order to be their best selves in school need to come with a full belly and with knowledge and the thought that they will be food secure. academically, students learn best when they feel secure in their food when they are not experiencing the thought of where will my next meal come from? what am i going to face when i go home will there be food at home? they come to school for the students in my district 2. if we are talking about making them academically ulsuccessful, physically successful, emotionally successful and mentally successful, food security plays a large role in the bigger picture of that. do this to ãbbeing healthy enough to be in the classroom to not miss class for doctors appoints or hospitalizations or anything like that.food insecurity play such an eimportant role in the larger picture and we often times look at it as a secondary thing but it is absolutely not. it is a binary concern among the people in my district because i've heard a lot of talking points today about a booming economy, i live, i been born and raised and live my adult life in the third congressional district of west virginia, we are one of the poorest congressional districts in the nation. here to tell you that in my rural areas, the economy is not booming. and the kids need this help. we talk about bootstraps, these are the boots for these kids. this is the help they need. thank you. >> my time is expired. i yield back. >> thank you chairwoman. i'd now like to recognize ranking member cloud for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. chairman. if i could start out by saying to ms. sullivan and the rest of you all, and mentioned i appreciate y'all being here, ms. fsullivan, i wanted to specific lycce, i appreciate you being here. i hope you don't feel ashamed. that's why it's there. that's why the program is there. i do think it takes courage to be here today to tell your story. i do think and i realize in the polarizing environment you are walking and from what you see on tv a lot of times people walk in these situations with entrance positions but i think there are those of us who are working to find a way to preserve it for those who need it. and make it more efficient. i think that's a good honest conversation to have. mr. adolphsen. this is a little wonky, we just heard this rule changes snap, is that actually right? could you clarify the connection? it's not really as direct as it's being ã >> sure. the rule that is being discussed is a change to snap, not to the school lunch program. the snap eligibility standards set in federal law have been mentioned you could not have income over 130 percent of the federal poverty level and you cannot have liquid assets available to you, cash, recreational vehicles, things you could quickly liquidate to cash in excess of 2250, $2250. the broad-based categorical eligibility loophole does away with that asset test and raises the income thresholds up to 200 percent in most states and up to 185 percent or 165 percent in other states.to where the school lunch comes into play is that if you are on snap, you are automatically eligible for school lunch with no application. that's what some folks are talking about that there is a group of students who may have to apply with the school lunch application. i grabbed one here from the state of maine, it's one page. they may have to apply to that application, but they will still maintain their eligibility, it just won't be automatic. >> it was also stated that 3 million people would lose snap benefits but could you explain the difference between losing eligibility versus actually losing benefits. >> right now there are approximately 5 million people who are ineligible by federal law standards and when this loophole is closed in broad-based categorical eligibility, that pathway is closed, it will go back to categorical eligibility, if you are actually receiving a welfare ebenefit, you will stil be automatically eligible for food stamps. the only thing that is changing is you can't get this brochure handed to you and thus getting rid of the asset test and increasing income limit. that piece of it will go away. then we will go back to the federal standards that are in law that congress passed that both income and asset limits. >> to rephrase it, you basically saying that the executive branch is working to realign regulations with the stated will of congress passed in law? >> that's correct. the bbc e rule was created entirely through regulation step at a time the clinton administration even acknowledged the intent was to expand this to people who are actually getting a benefit not just receiving or in many cases not even receiving a marginal funded brochure and they acknowledge that at the time but it's taken on a life of its own obviously it's 42 states are using it and millions of folks are coming in to that pathway. this rule simply re-orients the eligibility policy practical level on the ground with what congress actually passed in law. constitutionally the proper way to fix this would be for congress to act if it wants to change its will. >> absolutely. i mentioned in my you want to give everyone in the country food stamps, you have the authority to do that pass a law and get signed into law and that certainly can take affect but as the law stands right now this regulation sits squarely outside of it and it's really incumbent upon the administration to correct that. thank you, i yield back. >> and guinea use the five seconds. ms. davis. basically what's going on is that they want to make a uniform $2250 asset test for the entire united states and they want to say that no state can raise the income level beyond 130 percent of the poverty line, which is uniform for the entire united states. can you comment on that and why states would actually want to raise the income levels and asset test depending on what part of the country you live in. new york city versus west virginia for instance. >> first, it's easy to focus on things like a brochure gets you onto snap, which is untrue, receiving a brochure guarantees no one snap benefits. anyone coming into broad-based categorical eligibility still has to go through an interview. they still have to document their income and comply with all of the other program requirements. many people that might be categorically eligible for snap at their net incomes are too high to get benefit, congress intended to give states flexibility during welfare reform and that's well-documented. they also intended to encourage work and to encourage efficiency across programs. two things that broad-based categorical eligibility does very well. one thing that's very important to understand with millionaires and people with airplanes, this policy helps working poor families with children who have incomes modestly above 130 percent of poverty, gross incomes, before deductions for ucthings like high housing cost high childcare costs, high out-of-pocket medical costs are deducted. and only .2 percent of snap benefits are going to people with net after those deduction incomes above hundred 30% of poverty. it's not an automatic gateway, it isn't a policy benefiting millionaires and it supports and encourages work. as you know, housing costs in boston are very different from housing costs in great falls montana where i'm from. childcare costs are high from anywhere in many states care for an infant can cost more per year than in-state tuition for college. states need this flexibility and it helps them make work pay for their population. >> thank you. i would now recognize congresswoman porter for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. mr. adolphsen, how much do you pay each month for electricity? and how often? >> each month, i could get my phone out and check exactly but it's probably about ã>> could you. >> probably $280 and $300 a month. >> tell me about your children. >> i have three children, they are not school age. >> how much how often do you pay for sewer? >> once every four years when the septic chart comes to clean it out. >> how much and how often do for house insurance homeowners insurance? >>. >> could you repeat that? >> how much and how often you pay for homeowners insurance? >> that's once a year i purchased that policy. >> how many hours did you work last week? >> i don't know. >> what is your hourly rate? do you know you are hourly rate of pay as you sit here today? >> yes ma'am, i know how much i get paid. >> hourly? >> i do not get paid hourly. >> but you know how much you get paid calculated as hourly. >> what does this have to do with ã >> i get to ask the questions, you can answer them or not answer them, that's your prerogative. do you know your gross pay before deductions? >> i do. >> do you know what day of the week your paycheck is received on? >> yes i do. >> what is that? >> i'm not going to answer that. >> let's go through, do you knowwhether you owe any certificates of deposit? >> i know my financial situation quite well. >> how about your account number for your ira? 401(k)? >> my account number? i don't have that handy but i could get it in about 11 seconds. >> tick-tock. i will wait. >> and me to be respectful and keep my phone in my pocket as we are asked to do. >> the reason i'm asking you all these things mr. adolphsen as i want to show you the state of maine application for food supplement looks thlike. for snap. >> yes ma'am, i ran the program for four years. >> this is a six page application for snap. i asked you a handful of these questions to fill all of this out, there's so many pages on dropping them, i apologize. this is a handful of what you would have to fill out, this is information that is much more extensive then, for example, i'm required to provide in my congressional needed financial disclosures as a member of the house of representatives to the american public. are you aware, does the heresearch ãbwhat does the research say about what happens when you increase the paperwork and informational burdens on applications for something like snap or cash benefits? what is the research say? >> i'm not sure what research you referring to? >> the research conducted by folks like ãband others about what happens when you make the paperwork application burden longer, what happens to eligibility cannot.>> i can tell you my experience in maine administering the program was that the vast majority of applications were completed online or on the telephone, not to paper application and we actually under my watch undertook a process to streamline that even further so that it would be easy for folks to get on the computer we set up kiosks right in the regional offices where we provided computers and support for people.>> are those offices open on nights or weekends?>> yes. we have night and weekend hours. we change our staffing rotation to give it two nights of the week we are open. >> that's great. i think that's really important. with that i will yields back. >> thank you congresswoman. ms. davis, you want to comment on the application forms. what type of burden does that place on applicant's depending on the length of the questioning and the forms? >> a number of studies show that the more questions, the longer the form, the less likely people are to get to the process. there been several points today about how many of the kids who wiwill lose direct certificatio to snap will still be eligible by filing an application. i think if you talk to any school district around the country, they will tell you that that is a challenge. in this case, usda itself has admitted they do not have a plan to inform those impacted and to reach out to them to let them know their kids will be an eligible ãbwill be eligible. i think for families that are losing snap and their kids are dropping out our free meals they may assume they are no longer eligible. paper complexity, human error, stigma, there's so many barriers. because so many kids fall through the cracks in the paper applications are getting done accurately, or not getting done at all, congress mandated the states to do direct certification between snap and school meals because it's more accurate, it's more efficient, and it's more effective for catching the kids. >> thank you miss davis. without objection, congressman ãshall be permitted to join the subcommittee. and be recognized questioning g witnesses later. right now i recognize congressman calm her for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. chairman, my questions are going to be centered around the able-bodied adults without dependents rule. for mr. adolphsen. i apologize, for the questions you got earlier, i don't know what the purpose of those were but unfortunately the civility and common sense in congress ã ãand sometimes an adult world hespiral here it doesn't help when the speaker of house reps up the state of the union rep and the president after he gives his remarks. but that's for another day. anyone disagrees with that, we can debate that here. let's get back to what's important. that's governing. with respect to the new rule, before the december 2019 usda rule on snap work garments, how are states taken advantage of the labor systems as it relates to work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents?>> what states were doing as they were taking counties in various areas that had very low unemployment and grouping them with other unrelated counties that had high unemployment higher unemployment and getting permission to waive the work requirements kind of across the board in california for example, statewide waiver even among counties with two and three percent unemployment. >> how many states were waving the work permit? >> more than 30 depending on what time period you pick. >> how does the 2019 usda rule seek to clarify and update work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents. >> for those 18 to 49-year-olds able-bodied adults with no kids, twhat the rule does is i simply changes the criteria to be more in line with federal law which says that an area that has high unemployment can receive a waiver so what the rule does very generally is it makes sure those waivers can only apply in specific areas that actually do have an economic depression or downturn. >> during your time with the maine department of health and human services, how significant was the ample mentation of work requirements? >> from an administrative perspective it ivwas no more difficult than really any of the changes that we often receive from our legislature the regulation, we did some work to make sure that folks had a place to go to education and training. if they chose to do that and worked with our department of labor to set up those career center one stops and those types of things. >> have you seen where the implementation of work requirements could have actually helped to snap recipients. >> absolutely. we've seen that really and states across country florida, mississippi, arkansas, we've done studies there following each individual person who work requirements apply to come incomes more than doubled in a year folks went back to work in hundreds of different industries and their doing much better now earning more than enough to replace the benefit and amore. >> could explain how usda december 2019 work requirement world seeks to ensure said snap recipients achieve self-sufficiency. >> the bottom line is, we got one of the greatest economies that we had in decades. we have nearly 7 million open jobs in the usda look at these waivers and said we really need these folks, there able-bodied and to get into these jobs. off the sidelines into the workforce. it helps them and helps our economy. >> that's exactly right. the biggest complaint that i hear from job creators and business owners in my congressional district and throughout kentucky for that matter is the fact that they cannot expand their business, they're not going to invest additional capital because they don't have confidence that they can fill the open positions that would be created. we already have in my district, which is a poor district, tens of thousands of jobs open right now and if you pull the people, the working people in my district, and asked them do you support work requirements for oable-bodied adults that recei any type of welfare benefit? that paul would be close to 100%. this is something that i appreciate the administration trying to adopt and anything i can do to see that this happens, i'm certainly going to do it because that's what the people in my district want. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. >> ãbthanks to categorical eligibility, what's the cost of letting these kids go hungry instead? >> we are talking about human capital and talking about actual people we are not talking about data on a prspreadsheet or numbercrunchin. the cost is immense. if we let these kids go hungry we are playing reckless with their well-being. and their future as well. honestly, this is the future of our country and we are leading by example. academically the students need this.they need the nourishment for their brains to be able to focus, to be able to be attentive in class.i outlined in my opening statement if they're not attentive in class and unfocused, they fall behind which leads to behavior issues. we all know the statistics when children who fall behind in class and were subject to behavior issues and how that affects them in their long-term longevity in the school system. not to mention the emotional well-being the mental well-being. i'm proud of my district for what we've done with our universal feeding program because we have removed a lot of the stigmatization that surrounds students that can afford lunch versus students who might be on free or reduced lunch plan.however, that's not necessarily, that's s the exception and not the rule. we really have to remember that we are looking at people. we are not looking at numbers on a spreadsheet. thank you for the question. >> that question was from the west virginia king chamber of socommerce. i like to recommend congresswoman lee for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you for your leadership and having hearing on a really critical issue in our country right now. miss sullivan, yesterday one of my residents texted me, speak the truth even if your voice shakes. i want you to know i appreciate you speaking up. he spoke about something i think is very important and is a former community organizer one of the things we do is make sure we bring people in the room that can be in the room and when he spoke up, you did that. thank you so much. i want to ask a question for all of you, do you think children can learn if they're hungry? >> ms. davis? >> absolutely not. i think if you ask any teacher in this country or any parent, kids can't come to school hungry to learn if they're just plain hungry. teachers every year we find is that three out of four teachers say they regularly teach kids who are coming to school hungry. and the data bears that out too. >> yes gror no principle? >> absolutely not. i think everybody has been hungry at one point in their life regardless of age. it's very hard to focus as an adult but much more so at fairchild at six years old and try to figure out what's going on in class and if you don't have a stable meal in your belly when you come into school it makes it extremely difficult. i would even argue that even if it is affects many students or if it's just one child in your class as a teacher i'm sure ms. tony can explain, it takes one child sometimes that's hungry that can disrupt a class that affects all of the students in the classroom as well. >> sorry because of time but yes or no?>> unequivocally no. >> hunger is painful and students cannot bear that burden. >> how about you? >> 10 children ãbcan children learn at their hungry yes or no? >> not my kindergartner. >> there's been a lot of discussion about public assistance and so forth and this trying to prevent fraud. this always comes up. pri want to tell you all met in downtown detroit right now i have the third poorest commercial district. the politicians, the elected folks there decided to shift $400 million away from school aid fund to an adult playground downtown, it's a hockey stadium. $400 million away from school stadium for a billion-dollar ey development. a billionaire was building it. in exchange, the promise was to qualify to be able to say given the green light to do it is to hire 50% local residents to develop the 39 ãfor a dollar in downtown detroit. at the end they didn't do any of those things. broken promises. you think that's fraud, ms. davis, yes or no? >> i don't know that i'm qualified to speak on that. >> does that sound like fraud to you that they took public dollars, $400 million away from school aid in exchange for promises they made they were going to do to help benefit the whole community and the public thbecause they subsidize their stadium? >> i can say that's a promise broken and if we did that at our school would be ã >> but on food assistance they would take it away and probably make you pay. sounds like fraud to me. >> it sounds like fraudulent behavior and immoral behavior. >> how about you sir? >> yes ma'am, sounds like fraud to me. >> absolutely. do you know what we could've done with the $400 million? not only to feed children but we could have funded 218 new teachers in the detroit public school system where we had a deficit of 200 teachers before the school year began. that's what we are doing but we do not talk about them as committing fraud. when moms accidentally don't bring in their wage stuff. i get calls all the time, i did it submit the documents in time, can you help me? or, this was off or they were doing an asset test on a car they got from their mother. all of that, it's fraud. where a company that's making billions of dollars and selling concert tickets, we are literally cast tech high school in my district, you can see it from the stadium down the street from the stadium, we had to shut down the drinking fountains because the water is contaminated. these are the things that we are doing, we are shifting away these public dollars that can be used to feed children because they cannot learn if they are hungry. but we don't call that fraud.al we call mother trying to feed her children and do everything possible to do it, sometimes, it's food, it is food, not for coats, not a membership to a golf course, it's food for your children, food for your family, it is food. i'm tired of us treating them completely differently, especially when it's a billion-dollar development that makes more money off the backs of our kids. thank you mr. chairman again and i hope you all continue to speak truth, i think it's critically important. thank you very much. >> thank you congressman. i recognize congressman ãfor five minutes of question. >> thank you mr. chair. miss sullivan, i was struck by your testimony particularly this line "shall i revert to the days when i would casually pass up an opportunity to eat today so that my children have a better chance of eating tomorrow". if you don't mind, could you speak about times in your life you may have led to do that. >> i do hope that other members of the committee do have the time and the opportunity to redo my full written testimony. it was a challenge for me. it forces me to relive these very traumatic experiences. honestly, i think some of it i've kind of blocked out the best of my ability. that's the reality of what so many of us deal with. there have been those times when i've looked, i prepared the best of what i could for a meal and i'm a great cook. and i had to ration out food. as i rationed it out and looking at the plate of one child and the other end based on age and where they are and what they ãwhat i feel the need for nourishment, rationing out the food. it gets to me and of course is apparently put yourself last. that's not singular to me, it's what we do as parents as providers. they have been on numerous occasions, snap has come into my life in times of need and then i've been able to walk away. sometimes i been what's called the turner i've been on and off the program. it's done exactly what it's been intended to do but as i said as parents, there is shame associated with it when we are walking into the spaces were basically the police are trying to keep us from accessing these programs that are intended to assist us. we are looked at as a fraud before somebody in need. i can't speak enough to what that does to a person, of course we can imagine and envision what physically that does to a person but mentally what it does to a parent who's oejust trying to provide the be for their children.th >> thank you for sharing such a personal story. if ms. sullivan came to you and said she's at 140 percent of federal poverty line and told you her story would you believe she would should get food stamps? >> i would follow the eligibility standards. >> if she came to you and said, having to skip meals and my kids otherwise will go hungry and i need this and he believed it to be true, but it's 140 percent over the federal poverty line you would say no she doesn't qualify. >> personally, i would help, if i could. >> you are administrating in maine, i'm just saying, is this the type of case people came to you. >> with bbc she would be eligible so i would say yes but under the federal law food stamp eligibility, she would be an eligible. >> the trump administration is doing is trying to make her ineligible and he would support that, you would think someone like ms. sullivan shouldn't get food stamps. i just want to be clear because i saw your testimony about otprivate planes and all that, let's be honest here, that's not what we're talking about. we are talking g about whether someone like ms. sullivan with 140 percent of poverty should get food stamps or not. if you want to say that she shouldn't, at least it's an honest answer. then we can have a different of values but let's be very clear about deposition. >> sir, i am being honest. the broad-based categorical eligibility loophole that is being closed by y this rule, as mentioned in my testimony is much more about assets than income.you heard from several testimonies that income is the smaller piece of this particular rule. i'm being completely honest about what this rule does. >> you're making an individual determined ãs. >> if i could just finish, how much money with the rule save the federal government? >> several billion dollars. >> how much exactly? >> it depends on the final ãb >> you are basically saying for $2 billion-$3 billion commuter know how much it would save which is less than one percent for defense budget you would describe millions of miss sullivan's of food. just so we have our priorities. ....... by federal law . >>. >> which is one percent of our defense budget that comprises probably 1 million people and mister sullivan of food >> i'm not prepared to discuss the defense budget at this foodstamp hearing . >> okay thank you. i now recognize congressman grossman for five minutes of questioning. >> i want to go over this one more time. can you give us an overview of the categorical eligibility and how it came about? >> certainly. categorical eligibility is allowed in federal foodstamp that says if you are receiving a welfare benefit, you are automatically eligible to be enrolled in the food stamp program. that was so the clinton administration came into broad-based that. the welfare benefit and then you have to get a benefit from the welfare program by doing that the income limit is then raised from 130 of the five federal poverty level up at 200 percent and the asset test is completely eliminated through that process. >> do you know 200 percent. >> it is the mid- 30000 range. >> the asset test means that you can be a millionaire andd be eligible for the program. >> it ranges widely we know from the usda data thatpr half of thesein individuals have more than $20000 of liquid assets. >> is there any downside you can think of from the lunch program other than just cause? >> any downside to putting them on the school lunch program? as long as it complies with what congress set for the eeprogram i see no problem with it. >> can you comment on your experience? >> what i am seeing is the program has been very successful in our school we 57 percent coming from direct certification that means they qualified for a snap benefit including household income. what we have seen since we had been participating in the cpe program it is a direct impact in the amount of meals served and before we had the program we only had 64 percent participation in the meals offered now we have 96 percent participation so even though we did have free and reducedar lunch applications in the past now we have higher participation and as a result ofof direct impact on student behavior issues. >> what i was trying to get at is sometimes it is said if you give my benefits it affects the parents because they have less responsibility for their childrenll. i will put it that way so it's good if you have more buy-in on your children's upbringing. do you see any of that? >> as the parent of children i certainly want to be involved in their upbringing and taking care of them but what we are talking about those that are on snap those in excess of the federal limit that was set or have resources that are available toou them to take care of themselves and their families without the benefit. >> but i'm trying to get at our their benefits to give parents responsibility other than just monetary benefits to the federal government? we run almost a 1 trillion-dollar per year deficit pero gretel mean to minimize the cost savings that you read stuff about affecting parents as the government assumes more of that parental role. >> i hate - - and that parents shows that active involvement ri critical to the children succes success. >> i will yield the remaining of myei time to make the trillion dollar deficit was caused by the 2017 tax law that added almost $1 trillion to d the deficit. [applause] is not a couple billion dollars of snap benefits for go with regard to our guest can you please comment with this change will do to the administration of your school in sheboygan wisconsin. >> in my opening testimony we do have the lowest percentage of unemployment in the country and we are very proud of that however a lot of parents are not active in the economy when we talk about jobs is fair to mention there is a difference in the quality of of jobs for what parents are eligible for those that can provide a family wage and those that cannot that forces parents to make a decision between being there for your child or job for goa secondd as far as the administration in our school we talk frequently about the stigma parents and students have about participating in the program. before we can offer it to everybody we didn't feel it was comfortable to bring food into the classroom so by participating directly with the community eligibility progra program, that means now we can offer those to all students and that is something the teachers have extreme obuy-in they see the value and the benefit we are very happy with this program so to roll this back to make tough choices we will have to give food to some students and others not simply because their parents missed a box on an eligibility form. >> congresswoman, please educate us with your questions. [laughter] >> first mr. chairman i like toan introduce to the record to submit the long form snap benefits referenced by my colleague. >> without objection and so ordered. >> thank you to our witnesses f for sharing your devastating and compelling testimony. i'm having a hard time here because the stereotyping and the criminalizing poor is not a character flaw there but by the grace ofor god a hardship does not train on - - discriminate i'm so tired of my colleagues on the other side in another committee talking about student debt and the impact of the one one.6 trillion-dollar crisis on credit reports and they then don'ttions just take out the loans will have veterans who are defaulting on student loans because of multiple deployments. stop stereotyping who is struggling because under this administration more people are struggling than ever before because donald j. trump is an equal opportunity offender and abuser. i and as far as i am concerned this administration because of the humanitarian crisis at the border and money allocated but not released to puerto rico , the scourge of the public health crisis that is gun violence they refused to act on and now starving children. the cruelty is the point. then the occupant of this white w house in the so-called state of the union address when your story tells the truth of the state of our union the so-called state of the union address turns into a divisive campaign rallytu speech when there are so many baseless claims i could barely keep up and then to express a newfound interest that every baby has the best chance to thrive quote unquote and then to remind us quote every life is a sacred gift fromma god". 's alopecia has robbed me of my hair but not of my memory and i spent plenty of time in sunday school. this administration has forgot about the least of these so this is the ironic assertion to come from this administration putting more than 3 million individuals off of snap including more than 1 million children. in massachusetts more than 100,000 people stand to lose access to benefits including 72000 children. to quote doctor king who is not quoted enough coretta said starving a child is violence. punishing a mother and her family is violence poverty is violence let me be clear this administration attack on snap is nothing more than violence on the most vulnerable among us our children the elderly individuals with disabilities the poor and the sick. so by a show of hands, how many panelists believe the trump ots administration eligibility changes to the stat program will ensure that our children have the resources they need to thrive and grow? >> who believe these changes will assure that. most of us is not fooled as is the case the cruelty is the point so let's them and unpack the real impact the proposed changes on children i am running out of time so we spoke already about the destabilizing effects but ms. sullivan and ms. davis speak to the long-term effects not just short-term of food insecurity or starving a child. >> yes. i have been homeless with my children and experienced hunger and i have had children who have been held back in school perk i can speak to the personal trauma but children are repeating grades in addition to medical expenses to respond to the physical. and that is very traumatizing for our children and they feel that and they live that even though we try our best to protect them from that. >> thank you congresswoman. you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you all for your testimony. is very muchted appreciated. i'm thinking about these new rules that the trump administration has rolledtr out. i was reminded i went back our attorney general one.ed neese under president reagan made a comment where he said that people go to soup kitchens because the food is free and that is easier than paying for it.us he thought it was convenience. i remember the outcry at that time the callousness of that, and that perspective. people don't reach for these benefits or take advantage of the opportunity to access snap benefits because it's more convenient than going to a restaurant or add a supermarket but because they have a desperate need. it is offensive to suggest explicitly or implicitly by rolling out this new policy that that is the case. so i bring to this discussion in a conviction that our schools are a tremendous opportunity both in terms of nutrition of what we are speaking to today and health. a very strong proponent as my colleagues are here for her bolstering the school date health center. and to make sure nutrition is available to young people for all the reasons that you discuss. thank you for that testimony. so i want to ask a more open ended question and whoever wants to answer is invited to do so. does america know that we are hungry? it is incredible to me that so many millions of americans including millions of children are going to bed hungry every night in this country of tremendous wealth. i know that people are charitable. you look at food drives and the food banks across the country. so do we not know we are going country? this are we hiding it away? to bring momentary focus to the collection if you pull the curtain more unbelievable it is. so just speak to that you are operating in a place of heightened awareness and sensitivity to this issue but you must scratch your head from time to time and wonder how is it we don't bring this in a more direct fashion. >> that is a fascinating liquestion unfortunately if you have never experienced food insecurity then you go from a point of privilege but also there is another piece to this and when we are constantly bombarded with this anministration's talking points of stereotypes that people are poor and lazy we are attacking their dignity and to be constantly bombarded it permeates the culture and we work on the front lines in the trenches every day and then with some of the other issues that bombard the american people and places of privilege that some people come from. >> it's downright shameful that if you don't see it every single day and don't understand the effects on our future it is scary and the problem is big with an overwhelming sense we try to bury it away. i agree if you see parents and i work with a lot of parents in the situation they all want what is best for their kids i have never met a parent in my years of education i have ever seen where they want their kid to do poor or don't want them to be successful in the future all the parents i have ever met have want their kids to be better they look for opportunities not because it's convenient for them but because they needed help and i feel that's my responsibility andr how i will help and that is what i will do. >>. >> i think it is completely hidden away. with poverty and hunger and despair and then to close the door to turn my eyes away. and it will haunt us as a nation and thank you for convening the hearing perk i hope we can continue the focus thank you for your testimony. i yelled back. >> what we have seen today is that snap works it helps people it helps adults, it helps children, it helps the economy. it has the lowesty. fraud rate of practically any government program. so what's the point? the real point going on to cut back the eligibility requirements. politics. i think it is politics to show that we are being tough on poor people and to do so hope that they correct their ways and work harder and that they freeload less and be better people. but actually the people that use these benefits are just like you and me in fact i was one of those people. at the end of the day what we do defines who we are as a country. and to donald trump i would say do not go forward with this rule and do not attack our children. we are better than this. i would like to recognize the congressman connolly for five minutes of question forgive me orr being in and out of the hearing but i had other commitments on the impact of moving the poverty program. one of those characteristics of snap against flexibility atth the state level. >> absolutely. one of the reasons congress has reaffirmed broad-based categorical eligibility over the past 20 years is recognizing the different circumstances the cost of housing, childcare costs but one that all states value in congress has reinforced is the need to help support families as they work their way out of poverty to increase earnings with modest assets. research shows if families can build assets they are less s kely to be plunged deeper into poverty and the safety net. >> so if they are given the flexibility there is a big difference between birmingham alabama and fairfax virginia. >> absolutely. >> and the program gives the flexibility. what would happen if the trump policy as proposed would go into effect with that flexibility? >> itt would be very burdensome on the states. if the flexibility were taken the states would have a great burden. look at the 183,000 comment submitted under this rule you'll see hundreds from different state agencies or local organizations talking about how upsetting it is for communities, families, schools and others in the state and states will incur millions of dollars of cost having to retrofit their termination systems to train employees in all of the other pieces that come with implementing a change of thehat magnitude. >> looking at who could be affected, three.1 million families with kids could be affected and could actually have that eligibility affected if this change would go into effect. that's a pretty large number. >> it is very significant with the rest seniors and individuals losing snap word obviously impact significantly leading to higher cost that communities would lose out because as we talked about earlier those dollars are spent immediately 80 percent are spent in the first two weeks 97 percent by the end of the month and they support farmerrm farmers, truckers, grocery stores so there is a ripple effect that those are good points because talking about this subject ten years ago when i was shocked when they told me that grocery store in their community, 60 percent of their business is snap. so if you make fewer people eligible is not only for those in terms of nutrition and the health of their kids, but in terms of a local economy, you could, drive grocery stores or food chains out of business frankly if you materially affect eligibility. >> yes. that impact is widespread and felt throughout the community. we hear time and again in areas that have not seen a robust recovery, that grocery stores for when benefits are loaded up because that is when - - shopping occurs. cbo reaffirmed recently that as far as stimulus is concerned it is the biggest bang for the buck because they immediately go into the economy to help create and maintain jobs and economic support toto trucking and growing. . . . . i want to thank all of you for joining us today. and thank you, mr. chairman for having this hearing. >> thank you, congressman. i like to think our witnesses for the testimony today, without objection all members will have fiver legislative days within o submit additional written questions for the witnesses to the chair. those will be forwarded to the witnesses for responses. i asked her witnesses to please respond as promptly as you are able. this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] c-span "washington journal" life every day with new and policy issues that impact you. coming up saturday morning, new hampshire young democrats lucas meyer discusses the 2020 new hampshire primary. and issues motivating young voters. and then ellen nelson on the 2020 new hampshire primary. an new hampshire public radio reporter broadcast cohost discusses the history and future of the primary. watch c-span "washington journal", live as seven eastern saturday morning, join the discussion. >> sunday night on q&a videogame developer is bringing peace and conflict resolution through the refugee experience to a wider audience. >> as someone who has been through a lot. [inaudible] >> watch sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span q&a. >> 75 years ago this month the united states, great britain and the soviet union met to discuss a post-world war ii germany and a liberated europe and sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv real america, in 1945 documentary of the meeting, the conference. >> i come from the crimea conference. >> with a firm belief that we have made a good stop on the road to the world of peace. never before have a major ally been more closely united. not only in war but peace. >> we will talk with medal of honor recipient who recounts his experiences as a marine on un eo gmac. >> screaming and yelling and that kind of stuff. and i really thought everybody lost their mind. i cannot figure out what was going on. and then i caught on what was going on, then i looked and there was a war on top of their. >> this we can explore our nations passed on american history tv on cspan3. >> politico across the country on the annual state solution conference in washington, d.c. they are gathering in the nation's capital for the governance association winter meeting this weekend. tomorrow we will have live coverage of secretary of state mike pompeo delivering the keynote address at the mga winter meeting starting at 2:45 p.m. eastern. now governors from across the country address politico state solution conference. starting with illinois democratic governor. [applause] >> thank you. good morning, everybody my name is darius dixon and the associate editor for politico and the editor for illinois playbook a daily newsletter that we have covering all things politics in the great state of

Related Keywords

New York ,United States ,Arkansas ,New Hampshire ,United Kingdom ,Texas ,Washington ,Kentucky ,Florida ,California ,Virginia ,Wisconsin ,Russia ,Mississippi ,West Virginia ,Germany ,Puerto Rico ,Maine ,Massachusetts ,Guinea ,Ohio ,Acton ,Britain ,Americans ,America ,Soviet ,American ,Mike Bloomberg ,Nixon Berger ,Elisha Cummings ,Mister Sullivan ,Darius Dixon ,